EA: PC is Becoming the World's Largest Gaming Platform

[cyber_andyy]

Im hoping that this means developers will think of PC more than just badly porting console games.

 

[Ilosia]

For me some games work best on consoles, some stuff works better on PCs, the most obvious categories being those which required a lot of looking around in a first person perspective e.g. the shooters belong clearly to the PC and it's mouse, games which require complex manoeuvring are far better suited to the analogue sticks of controllers which far outrank a keyboard's primitive directional keys.

 

[Steelfists]

PC games have far and away the highest revenue anyway.

 

[Pendragon9]

PC's still suck IMO

Until they stop using that SecuROM bull. Because just about every comp game I have installs it without my permission.

 

[Crabid]

Controllers have long surpassed keyboards and mice as the gamer's weapon of choice

I disagree massively, I much prefer the feel of a mouse and keyboard, for one, aiming with a mouse means that FPS games don't have to be slowed down 20+ % for crappy joysticks. Not to mention that with a controller you can very fast end up with a lack of buttons to bind compared to a keyboard, and while many would consider that a good thing, I think that can significantly harm a lot of games with a lot of actions you may need to complete on short notice. Specifically, MMORPG's such as wow. Final little personal preference, I like to be able to type to communicate with people online, there's always a record of it, in the short term at the very least and a lot of the time I like to listen to music or watch films at the same time (2 screens on my PC). Consoles obviously have no such function, its just voice coms or nothing.


Also, the potential capacity for gaming of a PC will always surpass that of a console, if for no other reason than a console has to be aimed at a wide market and is thus limited by an average price people are willing to pay, gaming PC's on the other hand, allow people to spend as much as they like on their platform, and then allow the player to tweak the settings based on what they care about.

Personally, from what I have seen in the past few years, having a game released on a console instead of being a pure PC game only results in the game being sub-par. Bioshock would be a classic example of this, an fpsrpg without an inventory as well as the vitachamber. Then we had farcry 2, massively inhibited by the lack of factions in game, resulting in everybody you meet outside a town shooting you and only you. Combined with the total railroad plot, which I would blame on the total lack of factions, I could go on slating it, but that would just be story and poor design choices, not really console limitations.

In short, I hold nothing against people who have consoles, I mean whatever you like, but there are a hell of a lot of benefits to a PC over a console, especially considering you can buy controllers for PCs if you want to, but a console is always cheaper and easier I guess. What I do have a grudge against however, is developers who wreck games with massive potential for the console market. So I'm sorry for those console gamers amongst you if my posts makes it seem like I hate you, you peasants!

 

[szaleniec1000]

I've never seen any evidence in the real world of this whole "PC gaming is dying" thing that everyone seems to talk about on here, with new PC games coming out all the time and obviously selling or Game wouldn't be devoting so much shelf space to them, and it seems that EA agrees with me. There's also more than a few small and medium-size PC exclusive developers who seem to be doing well for themselves.

 

[oliveira8]

That's pretty strange, because ever since I was a kid, granted i started with a nintendo, but as soon as I got my first computer game it's always been about PC gaming for me. Console always lagged behind in second place. Consoles are great for certain types of games, but nothing beats the freedom you have on a PC.

This is exactly how it happened to me, except consoles aren't even in the running.
As I've said a million times, controllers suck.

But I'm not sure how I feel about this.

super awesome thirding on this point. pc is where its at. the only reason that sales of games on pc are lower is because there are so many games that the sales figures are all over the place, thus putting it at a low average, that and freeware games, damn they are addictive. and yes, controllers suck, especially ps controllers, 360 one mold to your hands but the PS ones? nope, its like they were designed for radiation victims of Hiroshima of something (too soon?)

And now that digital distribution as come with Steam and Impulse, the numbers of PC games being sold are highly inaccurate.

L4D sold more to the PC than to the 360, with Steam sales and Retail. But only the retail is counted as sales.

Nah not too soon.

 

[ward.]

Uh, wasn't the pc always the biggest gaming platform?

No, not for a while now.

 

[szaleniec1000]

PCs are just to expensive and keyboard and mouse subtracts from the game experience way too much. Would be a shame if consoles disappeared sometime.

Console gaming isn't going anywhere, and neither is PC gaming. They both have a role to play in the market. On the keyboard and mouse thing I can think of more than a few games I've played that would be a nightmare with any other control system, but I'd agree that some genres suit console-style controllers (which, incidentally, you can get for the PC) better.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

PC's still suck IMO

Until they stop using that SecuROM bull. Because just about every comp game I have installs it without my permission.

right and consoles like the 360 are better, they have way more DRM and such than a PC game has ever had

 

[jamesworkshop]

who cares the 360/ps3 graphics have been outdated since the release of the 8800GTX from 2006
actually expect the ps3 to last ten years.

 

[literallyanythingelse]

I think it's a case of games to suit each system - for example I like playing FPSs, RTS and... well pretty much everything on my PC, but racing and sports games you need a controller.
I don't actually have a console but my friends do and the ability to have lots of people playing the same game at the same time on the same machine is a big plus, it adds to the social fun - it's not the same playing, e.g. TF2 with your mates on a PC if all you can do is voice chat.
Little off topic, but yeah, the PC never went anywhere is what I'm saying. Compare something like Halo Wars to Company of Heroes and see what I mean.

 

[Pingieking]

okay that's one pc down, it will cost "50-100 now to actually upgrade it past the next gen console, of the bat a console is cheaper but over a long time span pc is cheaper.

Considering the i7 doesn't clock the same speeds as the Cell B.E., I can't see how £50-100 will get you close to it.
Again, PC's are much more expensive, mainly because the specs have to be much, much higher as games on PC aren't made specifically for one CPU and GPU, unlike console exclusives. Hence the reason why a PC has to have much greater specs than the PS2 to emulate PS2 games.
Plus a PS2 lasted me 4 years, the PS3 will last me 4 years. Thats a total of, £550. No PC will last you 8 years, especially not for £550. Maybe for £2500, but again, 8 years would be pushing it.

You two are arguing over something that doesn't need to be argued. A console is more or less a specilized PC, with the non-gaming related function stripped out to bring down the price. Of course consoles are cheaper, because they're designed to play games and nothing else. Of course PCs are more expensive, because they (unlike the PS3 commercials like to claim but fails to achieve) are actually able to do everything.
In a way, you're both right. A console is cheaper as a price tag thing, but PCs are conditionally cheaper. My gaming PC is essentially free (worth more than $1000). Why? Because I need wicked sick graphical and CPU powers for my work anyway. I'm going to shell out the $$$ for the monster PC regardless of my gaming habits. A lot of people need fairly good PCs for other reasons, and they have no reason to shell out another $300 for a machine that does less than what their PC can already do.